Lies told by joe biden
Executive summary
Joe Biden has been the subject of numerous fact-checks that catalog a mix of exaggerations, misleading statements and clear falsehoods; Washington Post counted dozens of false or misleading statements in his first 100 days, and fact‑check outlets continue to flag specific claims across his presidency and 2024 campaign [1]. Mainstream fact‑checking sites including PolitiFact, AP, TIME and FactCheck.org show a pattern: Biden more often stretches or embellishes than fabricates complex conspiracy claims, though both critics and partisan outlets have pressed much harsher labels [2] [3] [4].
1. The recurring tally: how many falsehoods and who counted them
The Washington Post’s Fact Checker tallied 78 false or misleading statements by Biden in his first 100 days, an early indicator that his administration would face sustained fact‑checking scrutiny [1]; independent trackers at PolitiFact and FactCheck.org have continued to log specific instances across speeches and interviews [4] [5]. These outlets document patterns—small factual errors, exaggerated policy claims, and the occasional demonstrable falsehood—rather than a single campaign of mass fabrication, and they apply different methodologies that produce different counts and emphases [1] [5].
2. Typical examples: embellishments, misremembering and clear errors
Fact‑checkers point to repeated tendencies: Biden has overstated policy achievements (for example, overstating how broadly insulin costs were reduced) and misstated specific events or numbers, which fact‑checkers describe as embellishments or misremembering rather than deliberate deceit [6] [2]. In debate and campaign settings, outlets such as AP and PolitiFact found Biden misrepresented the cost of insulin and overstated what former President Trump said about using disinfectant during COVID debates, while PolitiFact and TIME logged other inaccuracies in interviews and statements [6] [2] [7].
3. Where opponents and allies diverge: partisan fact‑framing and political messaging
Republican committees and conservative outlets often frame Biden’s rhetorical slips as proof of a “failed presidency” or intentional deceit, publishing lists of alleged misleads that serve political messaging purposes [8] [9]. Conversely, some defenders stress that Biden’s public appearances are more scripted and vetted than predecessors’, arguing that his falsehoods are fewer or less consequential—an argument noted by the Washington Post’s analysis that Biden’s prepared texts may limit, but not eliminate, errors [1]. Fact‑checking outlets remain the arbiter between these poles, documenting claims case‑by‑case [4] [5].
4. High‑profile contested arenas: elections, economy and foreign policy
On voting and elections, independent reporting found little evidence for the broad fraud narratives that have circulated around 2020, undermining any president’s claim that the 2020 outcome was stolen—a context in which Biden’s and others’ statements have been scrutinized [10]. Economic and policy claims have been another flashpoint: while FactCheck.org and PolitiFact parse employment and wage claims in nuanced ways, GOP fact sheets counter with broader indictments of Biden’s record, showing the political stakes in labeling statements true or false [4] [11] [8].
5. Limits of the record and how to read the findings
The available reporting documents many specific false or misleading Biden statements but does not support blanket claims that every inaccuracy was an intentional lie; fact‑checkers emphasize context, intent and impact when assigning verdicts [1] [2]. Conservative outlets amplify rhetorical lapses to political ends, while mainstream fact‑checkers catalog errors without imputing motive; reporting here is limited to published fact‑checks and mainstream analyses and does not adjudicate Biden’s intent beyond what those sources conclude [1] [12].